News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Advancing the price-performance frontier with GPT‑5.6 by gentlewater on Thursday July 30, 2026 @01:44PM (#49113233)
This is gonna put Sonnet 5 in a really awkward spot.
Re:Advancing the price-performance frontier with GPT‑5.6 by heaney-555 on Thursday July 30, 2026 @02:06PM (#49113512)
Luna is comparable to Haiku, not Sonnet.
Re:Advancing the price-performance frontier with GPT‑5.6 by 827a on Thursday July 30, 2026 @02:07PM (#49113532)
Totally untrue. Luna and Sonnet 5 are very comparable: https://artificialanalysis.ai/#intelligence

Luna is an extremely strong model.

Re:Advancing the price-performance frontier with GPT‑5.6 by re-thc on Thursday July 30, 2026 @02:19PM (#49113678)
> Luna is an extremely strong model.

By benchmarks, which sadly is a poor measure. Yes Luna is a good model under certain circumstances. Whether it is great for general usage is another story. Sonnet is definitely better when prompts are more vague and it needs to decide things. Luna generally sticks to things very strictly and goes off in bad ways.

Re:Advancing the price-performance frontier with GPT‑5.6 by mediaman on Thursday July 30, 2026 @02:34PM (#49113843)
Yes but there is a big, big market for subagents to consume lots of tokens cheaply and condense information up to parent agents. Luna would not be my choice for planning. But an explorer to comb through a codebase to find relevant parts? Or for enterprise retrieval, where it needs to search across many different types of data to see where to focus efforts for a smarter model? Or to wake up periodically to evaluate some conditions and determine if a bigger model should be spun up? Definitely.

I've previously found flash (for all the hate it gets) to be good for these kinds of things. Haiku was fine but it's ancient.

Re:Advancing the price-performance frontier with GPT‑5.6 by re-thc on Thursday July 30, 2026 @02:39PM (#49113910)
> Yes but there is a big, big market for subagents to consume lots of tokens cheaply and condense information up to parent agents.

That's again not some "intelligence factor" here. Different agents work for different use cases. Luna wins some. Terra wins some. Sonnet wins some. Flash was really good at exploring.

So I'm not sure what your point is? There's a big market for everything. Even within the market you describe it's likely not a Luna-size fits all either.

Re:Advancing the price-performance frontier with GPT‑5.6 by Klathmon on Thursday July 30, 2026 @08:16PM (#49117557)
I'm actually finding Luna to be an extremely strong model in practice.

I almost exclusively use it with xhigh or max effort, but when run like that it's been an incredibly cheap little workhorse for most development work. I'm still leaning on Sol for planning and debugging, but when it's time to start pumping out code I've been leaning into Luna (Max) and I've been enjoying it! And that was before the price drop, it's going to feel practically free at this point

Re:Advancing the price-performance frontier with GPT‑5.6 by jug on Thursday July 30, 2026 @08:51PM (#49117793)
Yes, I've seen this too and how Luna xhigh is so good that Terra doesn't really serve a purpose because beyond that you can continue at Sol medium. This can be the most cost efficient way, and especially now!
Re:Advancing the price-performance frontier with GPT‑5.6 by Philip-J-Fry on Thursday July 30, 2026 @03:53PM (#49114901)
In my real world use Luna is as useful to me as Sonnet. And it gets stuff done faster and follows my instructions more closely.
Re:Advancing the price-performance frontier with GPT‑5.6 by 3836293648 on Thursday July 30, 2026 @02:28PM (#49113773)
Anthropic basically downgraded all their tiers when they released Mythos, no nah, Sonnet 5 is the successor to Haiku 4.x
Re:Advancing the price-performance frontier with GPT‑5.6 by baq on Thursday July 30, 2026 @01:56PM (#49113385)
I use sonnet as a smart grep and haiku never and that’s only when I have to use Anthropic at all
Re:Advancing the price-performance frontier with GPT‑5.6 by bakugo on Thursday July 30, 2026 @01:52PM (#49113332)
Sonnet and Haiku were already in an awkward spot, likely by design.

Anthropic's big marketing push this year has been entirely focused on getting people to use Opus via a Claude Code subscription, to the point that Sonnet is almost viewed as the poor man's alternative, and from what I've seen, almost nobody uses it.

Actually, here's an interesting project for all the vibe coders looking for their next front page post: scrape a ton of commits from GitHub with Co-Authored-By: Claude and figure out what the percentage split between Opus/Fable/Sonnet is. I'm willing to bet it's less than 10% Sonnet.

Re:Advancing the price-performance frontier with GPT‑5.6 by supern0va on Thursday July 30, 2026 @02:04PM (#49113486)
>figure out what the percentage split between Opus/Fable/Sonnet is.

This may be misleading, since I suspect many are using a blend through sub-agents. I tend to bias for Fable to orchestrate and Opus for implementation via sub-agents.

Re:Advancing the price-performance frontier with GPT‑5.6 by StilesCrisis on Thursday July 30, 2026 @02:43PM (#49113970)
When I'm paying for it, Sonnet. When work is paying, Opus 5, then Fable if Opus gets confused.
Re:Advancing the price-performance frontier with GPT‑5.6 by petesergeant on Thursday July 30, 2026 @02:17PM (#49113645)
Opus 5 is not strong enough as the top-of-stack model, and feels idiotic after a week or two of heavy Fable usage, to the point where I'm paying for Usage Credits to keep using Fable rather than having to slum it with Opus.
Re:Advancing the price-performance frontier with GPT‑5.6 by Zarathruster on Thursday July 30, 2026 @05:16PM (#49115914)
I've found that Claude nearly always claims to be Opus in the commit message, regardless of the actual model making the commit.